Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 74,005   Posts: 1,633,518   Online: 872
      
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 60
  1. #21
    vpwphoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,182
    Blog Entries
    4
    Images
    7
    I vote for a K1000 to based on your budget concerns. The lenses are cheap and available too. You can have a nice 28mm, 50mm, and short tele for just $300.

  2. #22
    Diapositivo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,844
    An autofocus camera is not a modern alternative to a manual focus camera, it's just a different beast. You get a brighter viewfinder, but you lose the ability to easily and correctly focus manually, because focusing screens in autofocus cameras are optimized for light transmission not for help in focusing.

    If you take pictures of fast moving subjects (such ad dogs and children) then autofocus is helpful. If you do street photography, or just cityscape etc then autofocus is a hindrance. If forces you to focus-lock-recompose which I find quite suboptimal. Besides with autofocus lenses you often have to give up on scale focusing. Depth of field marks are just a suggestion, but a useful one!

    Finally, I have nothing against a more recent camera that works. But all the automation in it (autofocus, motors) is something that can break or go out of calibration more easily than gears. Motor-induced noise can also be very annoying in certain circumstances. It's horses for courses, younger horses are not necessarily better.

    Generally speaking, I've no consideration for matrix metering at all. If you can't use an external light meter, you are better off using an internal one (whatever, but not "matrix") and then compensating manually than relying on what the camera thinks you should be doing (and the camera certainly cannot know better than you).
    Fabrizio Ruggeri fine art photography site: http://fabrizio-ruggeri.artistwebsites.com
    Stock images at Imagebroker: http://www.imagebroker.com/#/search/ib_fbr

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Toronto ON Canada
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    547
    For me mehanical shutter, no programming is the better route. Just picked up a Ashahi S1a that is built like a tank. All mechanical and not meter. Takes the very plentiful M42 lenses such as the Super Takumars which is some excellent glass and very plentiful so not expensive. Viewfinder is excellent and thought there is no split image focusing, I find the focusing easier than say a Leicaflex. No need for figuring out a batery solution as it has no built in electronics, hence no battery required. Yes, Sunny 16 Rule or hand held meter but it really is not an issue unless you are going to deal with say a bellows, filters or things like extenders as you will then need to remember the factor. Just plain good fashioned photogrpahy.

    A more modern choice would be the Yashica FX-3 or FX-3 Super, with the built in meter. Though they are not considered pro cameras they seem to be almost bullet proof. At the time Yashica design and made them it also was building the Contax line that felt only a little better. Happily both lines take the same lens mount so you can get some of the best glass out there and a camera that is very reliable but basic. I have 2 of them and the meters are spot on. These can be had very inexpensively and later when funds build up you can get something like a RTS series and use the FX as a backup body. The only weakness is the letherette covering that tends to shred and wear easily over time. One of mine I simply bought a piece of leather for a couple of dollars and made a covering that has lasted some 20 years and the other still has the original. A company does make a leather kit for the bodt for something like $60US but it is easy to make it as there is little complexity in the body design.

    A bit more modern with built in metering

  4. #24
    vpwphoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,182
    Blog Entries
    4
    Images
    7
    Personally, I'd stay away from the AE-1 and AE-1 programs...
    ... the ones I am coming across are showing electronic age... as in electronics are getting goofy... these are 30 year old cameras now.
    Nikkormat!!.. but they are heavy things.... nice though.

  5. #25
    CGW
    CGW is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,797
    Quote Originally Posted by Diapositivo View Post
    An autofocus camera is not a modern alternative to a manual focus camera, it's just a different beast. You get a brighter viewfinder, but you lose the ability to easily and correctly focus manually, because focusing screens in autofocus cameras are optimized for light transmission not for help in focusing.

    If you take pictures of fast moving subjects (such ad dogs and children) then autofocus is helpful. If you do street photography, or just cityscape etc then autofocus is a hindrance. If forces you to focus-lock-recompose which I find quite suboptimal. Besides with autofocus lenses you often have to give up on scale focusing. Depth of field marks are just a suggestion, but a useful one!

    Finally, I have nothing against a more recent camera that works. But all the automation in it (autofocus, motors) is something that can break or go out of calibration more easily than gears. Motor-induced noise can also be very annoying in certain circumstances. It's horses for courses, younger horses are not necessarily better.

    Generally speaking, I've no consideration for matrix metering at all. If you can't use an external light meter, you are better off using an internal one (whatever, but not "matrix") and then compensating manually than relying on what the camera thinks you should be doing (and the camera certainly cannot know better than you).
    Just not so. Late Nikon AF bodies have bright viewfinders with perfectly acceptable screens. Focus confirmation has never let me down. They're superb with MF lenses. Matrix metering isn't an option with AI-AIS lenses, just centre-weighted and spot. It's an "alternative" that works for me, sometimes better than my F3s, FEs and Fs.

    As for batteries, if the weather's cold enough to kill your batteries, then it's probably too cold for you and your fingers.

  6. #26
    Pumalite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Here & Now
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,078
    Quote Originally Posted by benjiboy View Post
    Yes, it's the 21st century my Canon A1 has only had to have the battery replaced
    three times in the twenty three years I have owned it., and I always carry a spare
    I prefer the Canon EF
    " A loving and caring heart is the beginning of all knowledge " ~ Thomas Carlyle ~

  7. #27
    Diapositivo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,844
    All this reminds me of one thing.

    Regarding autofocus, a friend of mine had a Canon film model, AF mount, I don't remember which model, which had a very advanced autofocus feature: the camera has several AF points, and could be instructed to focus on the AF point where the photographer is looking at the moment. Some sort of sensor looks toward the photographer's eye, and understands which AF point is it looking at, and uses that AF point to focus.

    I couldn't believe that. We went to his house and he showed me the thing. And it really worked! That, I think, was a sensible technical innovation. If one can train his eye to look at the focus point just before releasing the shutter, this mechanism, besides working very well for moving subjects, would also end the focus-lock-recompose ballet which one normally has to do with an AF camera.

    I'm generally weary of electronic in lenses (it breaks, it suffers condensations, it wears etc.) but this was a really interesting innovation, I was certainly impressed.
    Fabrizio Ruggeri fine art photography site: http://fabrizio-ruggeri.artistwebsites.com
    Stock images at Imagebroker: http://www.imagebroker.com/#/search/ib_fbr

  8. #28
    benjiboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    U.K.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    7,701
    Quote Originally Posted by Pumalite View Post
    I prefer the Canon EF
    I have a Canon EF as well, and I prefer it too, but there's very few of them about,especially in good usable condition, there's bags of AE1s and A1s around there cheap and plentiful.
    Ben

  9. #29
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,510
    Images
    60
    Fabrizio:

    And they can be really reasonable ($45.00): http://www.keh.com/camera/Canon-EOS-...900851405?r=FE

    I recently paid $28.00 for one, with kit zoom lens (thanks Craigslist Vancouver!).

    The only problems with the eye controlled focusing is that it depends on the interaction between the camera and the photographer's eyeball, and eyeballs vary. As a result, for some people it doesn't work, and for some others it doesn't work consistently.

    So far, for me, it seems to work well.

    There is another advantage to the system. It can be used to control other functions on the camera. On my camera it is set to engage the depth of field preview - I just "look" at a spot near the corner, and the lens stops down.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  10. #30
    ghostcount's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Near The Platinum Triangle, California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    252
    Images
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by Diapositivo View Post
    All this reminds me of one thing.

    Regarding autofocus, a friend of mine had a Canon film model, AF mount, I don't remember which model, which had a very advanced autofocus feature: the camera has several AF points, and could be instructed to focus on the AF point where the photographer is looking at the moment. Some sort of sensor looks toward the photographer's eye, and understands which AF point is it looking at, and uses that AF point to focus.

    I couldn't believe that. We went to his house and he showed me the thing. And it really worked! That, I think, was a sensible technical innovation. If one can train his eye to look at the focus point just before releasing the shutter, this mechanism, besides working very well for moving subjects, would also end the focus-lock-recompose ballet which one normally has to do with an AF camera.

    I'm generally weary of electronic in lenses (it breaks, it suffers condensations, it wears etc.) but this was a really interesting innovation, I was certainly impressed.
    Canon eye control - available on the EOS Elan IIE, EOS IXe, EOS-3, EOS Elan 7E, and EOS Elan 7NE
    “I drank what?” - Socrates

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin